Follow me...

Back To The Future: Ron Van Den Heuvel’s Money Laundering, Tax Evasion, Illegal Campaign Donations & Pay-To-Play Schemes For Corporate Welfare From Wisconsin Governors Spans From The 90’s With Tommy Thompson’s Commerce Department To Not-So-Great Scott Walker’s Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation; So Why Do The Feds Endorse Ron Rather Than Prosecute Him? (Is It The Power Of Love? Or The Love Of Power?)

21stOctober 2015Closed

Scott Walker isn’t the first Wisconsin governor to use lax oversight of state-controlled agencies to benefit criminally scheming campaign donor Ron Van Den Heuvel at the expense of taxpayers.

Doc Brown & Marty McFly are shocked at what they discover as they investigate Ron Van Den Heuvel’s history of misdeeds and his Spook-y Green Bay associates

Get in the DeLorean, Marty!

We’re gonna go back in time to examine Ron Van Den Heuvel’s starring role in Wisconsin corporate/political corruption!

Van Den Heuvel says he donated through others when he lived in Georgia

By Daniel Bice
of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
November 2, 1997

Businessman Ronald Van Den Heuvel says he donated money through Wisconsin residents to Gov. Tommy Thompson’s campaign for several years while living in Georgia — an apparent violation of state election laws.

In a recent interview, Van Den Heuvel was questioned about $10,000 in campaign donations that he and his wife made one day before the state approved a large issue of tax-free bonds for one of his businesses. Van Den Heuvel responded by saying he had given similar amounts in the past.

When asked why reporters had not spotted those earlier donations on Thompson’s financial reports, Van Den Heuvel said, “Yeah, you may not have because when I was a Georgia resident, I gave it to people here.”

Those Wisconsin individuals, whom he did not name, then turned the money over to Thompson, he said. Van Den Heuvel, owner of VOS Electric in Green Bay and other businesses, said he moved to Wisconsin three years ago.

“I didn’t want to do it as a non-resident, which is fine,” he said. “You got to do some separate things if you’re a non-resident. I didn’t want to do that.”

Kevin Kennedy, executive director of the state Elections Board, said state law specifically bars people from laundering campaign donations or knowingly accepting laundered funds. Kennedy said it could be either a civil or criminal offense, depending on whether prosecutors believe they can prove the campaign money was given or received in intentional violation of the law.

Kevin Keane, spokesman for the governor, said the governor and his campaign were unaware of any laundered money. If Van Den Heuvel did pass money through others to Thompson, Keane said, the governor will return the money immediately once it is identified.

C. David Stellpflug, Van Den Heuvel’s lawyer, called the Journal Sentinel to say that his client was talking about giving money to political parties. But in his interview, Van Den Heuvel was critical of parties, specifically saying he did not give to the Republican National Committee.

“To me, parties — they kind of get in the way,” Van Den Heuvel said. “I like to know the person and what kind of person that person is.”

By Steve Schultze
and Daniel Bice
of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
November 2, 1997

Like others before him, Ron Van Den Heuvel, a Green Bay-area entrepreneur, found the route to state largess with the help of Gov. Tommy G. Thompson.

Van Den Heuvel hit the jackpot in late September when an obscure state board awarded $24 million worth of tax-free bond financing to help him reopen an Oconto Falls tissue factory — the largest such approval this year and among the largest ever made by the state.

The award culminated nearly a year’s effort that included a formal application through the Commerce Department. But Van Den Heuvel worked informal channels to Thompson as well. And last May — the day before an initial financing award was made by the state — Van Den Heuvel and his wife donated a total of $10,000 to the governor’s campaign fund. Van Den Heuvel said he had been asked for the donation by Thompson’s fund-raiser in November 1996.

When asked by reporters last month about the campaign donations, Thompson moved quickly to return the money.

The subsidy will save Van Den Heuvel’s company at least $2 million in short-term financing costs, Van Den Heuvel said. The financing covers nearly half of the $52 million cost of renovating the Oconto Falls factory.

The circumstances of the case and others reviewed by the Journal Sentinel in an eight-month investigation suggest a trend in which donors and well-connected firms enjoy a close and mutually beneficial relationship with the Thompson administration.

“You don’t pay, you don’t play,” said a veteran lobbyist, speaking of state government generally, including the governor and legislators.

Most public attention has focused on Thompson’s upbeat personality and bulldog tenacity in achieving his goals during his unprecedented 11 years as governor. The newspaper’s investigation found another side of the Thompson story: an administration marked by the strong appearance of favoritism.

Thompson has relied on a close-knit group of lobbyists, corporate executives and friends to pull the strings of government, with many moving in and out of state jobs, the paper found. Some of those who were Thompson’s closest staff advisers now work as private consultants and lobbyists, trading on their access to the governor and blurring the line between government and private interests.

Thompson dismissed such criticism in a lengthy interview and complained about the scope, methods and findings of the newspaper’s investigation.

“Somebody gives you a rumor, you take that and you run with it, and you are trying to tear down this administration for no reason whatsoever,” Thompson said. “We’re doing a wonderful job running the State of Wisconsin.”

Thompson said he had almost no role in fund-raising and that the state favors never are granted for contributions. He said his administration was a model of efficiency.

“My whole state government . . . is a (model) of best practices,” Thompson said.

For the series, the Journal Sentinel interviewed more than 120 people: Government officials, lobbyists, business executives and others, many with direct experience in how insiders do business with the Thompson administration. The newspaper also examined records from eight state agencies and created or expanded computer databases of Thompson’s telephone records, state contracts, campaign donations and campaign spending.

The investigation found that campaign donations often correlate with success in winning state contracts, direct aid and other favorable treatment. Road builders, utilities, investment bankers and other groups have found their way to the inside track with Thompson’s administration.

For example, executives of four top road-building companies that have won $218 million in state contracts since mid-1995 also have donated at least $119,000 to Thompson, according to state records.

State law bans state officials from personally gaining from their positions, from swapping state aid for campaign donations. Using surrogates to make such deals also would be illegal.

Allegations of influence peddling in the Thompson administration are the subject of an ongoing state Justice Department investigation. The investigation has focused on whether state favors have been granted in exchange for political donations. That probe started early this year with utility deals but has broadened to include other areas of state government, according to persons close to the case. The department declined to comment.

A Case Study

The Oconto Falls paper mill financing provides a case study on how influence works in the Thompson administration and who can help get deals done.

Last year, Van Den Heuvel’s Re-Box Packaging Co. hired investment banker P. Nicholas Hurtgen, a former top aide to Thompson and the brother-in-law of Thompson’s paid fund-raiser, Phil Prange. Hurtgen was hired as the project’s financial adviser, but he also helped open doors for Van Den Heuvel with the governor and other administration officials.

At a face-to-face meeting with Thompson in his Capitol office last January, the governor made a point of telling Van Den Heuvel that granting state aid wasn’t his call, but he encouraged him anyway. “I told him to work with (Commerce Secretary) Bill McCoshen. I’m almost positive of it.

Van Den Heuvel said that he and his wife, Jan, donated a total of $10,000 to the governor’s campaign account earlier this year — the checks were delivered May 15, one day before Re-Box Packaging won state approval for $9 million in tax-free bonds. That approval was intended for financing to build a De Pere factory for Re-Box.

Van Den Heuvel and two partners also each gave $500 to the governor three days before the state’s five-member Volume Cap Allocation Council voted on the financial aid. Three other partners gave a total of $2,100 between late April and June.

An hour after the newspaper asked Thompson about the donations, Thompson’s press secretary, Kevin Keane, said the Van Den Heuvels’ donations would be returned because “we are just not comfortable about” the timing of the cash gifts. Van Den Heuvel later confirmed that $10,000 of his donations were returned. Keane said the other donations might be returned.

Before using the $9 million in state financing, Van Den Heuvel decided to drop his aid application for the De Pere plant and apply for even more aid for PCDI Oconto Falls Tissue Inc., the tissue-mill project. The council that awarded the earlier sum readily agreed to authorize the $24 million in financing aid.

Commerce Department staffers who reviewed the Oconto proposal, however, declined to make any recommendation on the request, also noting the large sum, if approved, would “significantly impact” the amount of tax-free bonding authority available for other projects. Numerous other projects proposed by other firms were not funded by the council.

Van Den Heuvel made the project switch, he said, because the Oconto Falls mill offered the opportunity to get government financing aid for a much larger portion of that project’s overall costs than the $9 million financing offered him for the De Pere project.

Van Den Heuvel, Thompson and other administration officials say the project was approved on its merits and there was no link between the campaign cash and the state aid.

“None whatsoever,” Thompson said. “Absolutely none.”

The donations “wouldn’t have anything to do with” the state aid, Van Den Heuvel said.

Officials said the Oconto Falls mill will provide 160 jobs in an area hit hard by this year’s plant closure. The $24 million in financing aid, while large, was far less than the total of $70 million that Van Den Heuvel originally requested for the De Pere Re-Box project, state officials noted.

Commerce Secretary Bill McCoshen also stressed that the aid, while allocated by the state, actually comes from the federal government, and no state tax dollars are involved.

Under the financing plan, company executives also could pay themselves and other company employees bonuses and pay shareholders dividends with the tax-free bonds, Van Den Heuvel said. They would not have been able to do that with taxable bonds.

Built a Record

By far Wisconsin’s longest-serving governor, Thompson, 56, has enjoyed enduring popularity and state economic prosperity during his administration. Since taking office in January 1987, Thompson has cut taxes and welfare, relentlessly boosted business, tamed the state bureaucracy and whipped the Legislature into submission.

Thompson also has snared national attention for his cutting-edge welfare reform efforts, something that may serve him as he pursues his continued interest in national office. He’s also expected to soon formally announce his candidacy for a fourth term as governor.

The image shifts when the focus is aimed at how power and influence work in Thompson’s administration. To move to the inside track, becoming a “friend,” in the code of Thompson insiders, requires loyalty, deference and never publicly criticizing the governor, said sources close to Thompson — both in and out of government. And those who are seeking government assistance are expected to “help,” which means making a donation.

Thompson has often said his policy decisions have no link with donations. In the interview, he emphasized his distance from fund raising, saying his role was limited to attending money-raising receptions. James R. Klauser, Thompson’s former top deputy and longtime campaign mastermind, declined to discuss fund raising in detail. He described a passive system in which volunteers vie to host fund-raisers.

Access to Thompson is offered by aides and advisers outside the administration to firms seeking contracts, favorable regulatory decisions and other state aid, the paper found.

For example, Thompson and his aides pressed state utility regulators on issues worth millions to large utilities, including Ameritech and Wisconsin Energy Corp., both major donors to the governor.

When Thompson allowed the governor’s mansion to be used for a charity event on Nov. 15 last year for the Camp Five Timber Museum, Thompson’s paid fund-raiser, Phil Prange, called large Wisconsin firms to suggest their attendance and the opportunity to have a one-on-one with the governor — for a price.

Lumber Museum Event

“Phil called me and said, ‘Do you want to have 20 minutes of quality time by contributing five grand ($5,000) to my mother’s museum?’ ” recalled one Wisconsin executive, who works for a firm with major state issues pending. Prange’s mother, Mary Connor, is spearheading the drive to upgrade the lumber museum in Laona, Wis.

Prange, responding only to written questions, denied promising access to Thompson in exchange for a donation to the museum. He also said the museum group did not use “political fund-raising lists” to identify potential donors.

As governor, Thompson has raised record sums, more than $6.5 million in his last run for governor and almost $15 million overall since his first gubernatorial bid in 1986.

The method for getting campaign money from firms interested in state help includes pleas made at opportune times.

In the Oconto Falls case, fund-raiser Prange called on Van Den Heuvel last November for a donation, a few months after Van Den Heuvel’s request for state aid had first been broached, according to Van Den Heuvel and state Commerce Department records. Prange was aware of Van Den Heuvel’s pending request for state financing aid when he asked for a donation, Van Den Heuvel said. Prange had approached him for donations in previous years.

“I made that $10,000 commitment to him in November (of 1996), OK?” said Van Den Heuvel. He claimed he’d been a longtime large donor to Thompson’s campaign, but the governor’s campaign finance records show just two other, smaller donations from Van Den Heuvel before the big donations were made last May.

Thompson insisted he never personally solicits donations and knows few details of how his campaign operation functions, despite his aggressive hands-on approach to campaigning and governing. But interviews with Thompson insiders, phone records and his own campaign records suggest the governor has taken a much more active role in his campaign money-raising machine.

The governor’s Capitol phone records, dating to January 1996, show 32 calls to fund-raiser Prange’s line at the governor’s campaign office, 26 calls to the state party or to state GOP chairman Dave Opitz, and 60 calls to the four businessmen who coordinate Thompson’s fund-raising strategy. They are Fred Luber, chief executive of Milwaukee’s Super Steel Products Corp.; J. Carleton “Sandy” MacNeil, a Mequon investment broker; Butch Johnson, president of Johnson Timber in Hayward; and San Orr Jr., chief executive of Wausau Paper Mills.

Thompson regularly phones and meets with those who run his fund-raising operation, including Klauser and other informal advisers outside of government. Although Klauser downplays his role, Klauser has expanded his campaign role since he left state government late last year to return to political consulting and lobbying, Thompson said. The governor only occasionally turns to Klauser for policy advice, he said, though others said Klauser’s policy role remained large.

Thompson said others in the office have access to his phone lines and might have made some of the calls. Furthermore, some calls likely would have been made to schedule events for the governor, aides said, which is allowable under state ethics rules.

Thompson denied personally making calls to Prange. Prange said others in the governor’s office called him “regarding scheduling,” but he didn’t elaborate.

None of the calls from Thompson’s lines to his fund-raisers was about fund raising, Thompson said. And he said he doesn’t know who gives or how much he’s raised until he reads a story in the newspaper. He denied having any current role in his own campaign money operation.

“I don’t do any of that,” Thompson said. “I hate it. I don’t like it. I am reluctant to do it. And so I’m not good at it.” The extent of his involvement is to show up at fund-raisers others arrange for him, he said. He never talks about money or policy there, he said.

“I go in, I schmooze and I leave,” Thompson said.

However, lobbyists for major firms and interest groups who do business with the state, and business executives interviewed by the newspaper, said the fund-raising events are sold as prime opportunities to bend the governor’s ear on state issues — often worth millions to major players in issues ranging from utility regulation to Indian gaming. The fund-raisers often include discussion of those issues.

“It’s wonderful, the access that’s provided” at Thompson’s fund-raisers, said one lobbyist who does business with the state.

A second lobbyist said Thompson’s fund-raising machine “systematically and methodically” milked firms with state business for donations. “Everybody understands if you go and ask the government to do something, you are going to have to make contributions.”

Both lobbyists asked not to be named, saying they feared retribution for speaking out.

State phone records also showed top aides to the governor, with whom he regularly confers, made numerous calls to the Thompson campaign office and GOP fund-raisers.

Klauser, in his last three months as Thompson’s top aide, called Prange 19 times, his phone records show. And Commerce Secretary McCoshen, who oversees a wide range of state subsidy programs for businesses, including the Oconto Falls financing, called Prange and the governor’s campaign office 21 times since January 1995.

State phone records show a series of calls during the period Van Den Heuvel was negotiating for his state financing aid, including a string of calls linking Thompson, his campaign, top state officials and Hurtgen, Van Den Heuvel’s project manager.

Thompson acknowledged that he might have talked to Hurtgen, his former aide, about Van Den Heuvel’s request for state financing aid.

“Possibly could have,” Thompson said. “I don’t know.”

Hurtgen declined to comment. Matthews and McCoshen said their calls to Hurtgen were not related to the Van Den Heuvel project.

“I’ve been a supporter of Gov. Thompson for a long time. I happen to think he’s the best governor,” Van Den Heuvel said.

MILWAUKEE (AP) Campaign contributions to Gov. Tommy Thompson often correlate with success for donors in winning state contracts, direct aid and other favorable treatment, according an investigation by a state newspaper.

Road builders and other groups who have contributed to Thompson’s campaign fund frequently are on the inside track with the governor’s administration, the report stated.

For example, executives of four top road-building companies that have won $218 million in state contracts since mid-1995 also have donated at least $119,000 to Thompson, according to state records.

An Associated Press review in June of road builder contributions to the Transportation Projects Commission found that at least $363,987 was contributed over the past decade to Thompson, the commission’s chairman.

The TPC has been criticized by state auditors for spending more on new roads than Wisconsin can afford.

The newspaper also reported that the Department of Justice is conducting an ongoing investigation of influence peddling in the Thompson administration.

The investigation has focused on whether state favors have been granted in exchange for political donations, according to the report. That probe started early this year with utility deals but has broadened to include other areas of state government, sources close to the case told the newspaper.

The justice department itself declined to comment to the paper and did not immediately respond to a call from The Associated Press.

Thompson said in an interview that he had almost no role in fund-raising and that the state favors are never granted for contributions.

“My whole state government… is a (model) of best practices,” he said.

The paper said its investigation also found that:

• Green Bay-area entrepreneur Ron Van Den Heuvel and his wife donated a total of $10,000 to Thompson’s campaign fund last May a day before Van Den Heuvel won state approval for $9 million in tax-free bonds to build a De Pere factory.

Van Den Heuvel and two partners also each gave $500 to the governor three days before the state’s five-member Volume Cap Allocation Council voted on the financial aid.

Three other partners gave a total of $2,100 between late April and June.

An hour after the newspaper asked Thompson about the donations, Thompson’s press secretary, Kevin Keane, said the Van Den Heuvels’ donations would be returned because “we are just not comfortable about” the timing of the cash gifts.

Van Den Heuvel later told the paper that $10,000 of his donations were returned.

Thompson, Van Den Heuvel and other administration officials say the project was approved on its merits and there was no link between the campaign cash and the state aid.

• Thompson may take a much more active role in raising campaign money than he says.

The governor’s Capitol phone records, dating to January 1996, show 32 calls to paid fund-raiser Phil Prange’s line at the governor’s campaign office, 26 calls to the state Republican Party or its chairman Dave Opitz, and 60 calls to the four businessmen who coordinate Thompson’s fund-raising strategy, the paper reported.

Thompson said others in his office have access to his phone lines and might have made some of the calls. He added none of the calls from his lines to his fund-raisers was about fund raising.

Some calls likely would have been made to schedule events for the governor, which is allowable under state ethics rules, the governor’s aides said.

Thompson also denied personally making calls to Prange.

As governor, Thompson has raised record sums, more than $6.5 million in his last run for governor and almost $15 million overall since his first gubernatorial bid in 1986. He has not said whether he would run for an unprecedented fourth term.

• Prange called large Wisconsin firms to request their attendance for a price when Thompson allowed the governor’s mansion to be used for a charity event on Nov. 15 last year for the Camp Five Timber Museum.

That price was a large donation to the lumber museum in Laona, where Prange’s mother is spearheading a drive to upgrade it, said one Wisconsin executive, who works for a firm with major issues pending before the state.

The newspaper did not name the executive.

Prange, responding only to written questions from the paper, denied promising access to Thompson in exchange for a donation to the museum. He also said the museum group did not use “political fund-raising lists” to identify potential donors.

The paper said it interviewed more than 120 people for a series of investigative stories about influence in Thompson’s administration. Many had direct experience on how insiders do business with the Thompson administration, the newspaper said.

Reporters also examined records from eight state agencies and created or expanded computer databases of Thompson’s telephone records, state contracts, campaign donations and campaign spending.

The two reporters examined records from eight state agencies, state contracts, campaign contributions and expenditures, and Thompson’s phone records. The eight-month investigation revealed a startling correlation between those who gave money to Thompson’s campaign and those who got lucrative state contracts.

In one instance, Schultze and Bice found that Ron Van Den Heuvel, a Wisconsin businessman, donated $10,000 to Thompson’s campaign fund the day before a state agency awarded him $24 million in tax-free bond financing to build a paper-manufacturing plant. Van Den Heuvel says a Thompson fund raiser asked him for the donation. The newspaper’s inquiry forced Thompson to return the contribution.

Schultze and Bice say the Van Den Heuvel affair was not an isolated incident. “The [Van Den Heuvel] case and others reviewed by The Journal Sentinel in an eight-month investigation suggest a trend in which donors and well-connected firms enjoy a close and mutually beneficial relationship with the Thompson administration,” they wrote.

You can investigate that claim for yourself by downloading current Wisconsin campaign finance data from the CFIC or by searching the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign Web site at http://www.wisdc.org/.

Another strength of using campaign finance data is the ability to show how big money flows around the sometimes useless legal breakwaters that are meant to stem the tide.

Darrel Rowland of The Columbus Dispatch found that non-cash loans and in-kind contributions to parties or legislative campaign committees are exempt from state limits in Ohio. According to The Dispatch, the biggest beneficiary so far of this loophole is Cleveland area state Senator Robert A. Gardner. State Republicans funneled more than $900,000 into Gardner’s last campaign, or more than 90 percent of Gardner’s total reciepts. A sudden, last-minute $384,000 advertising campaign paid for by the state party and “loaned” to Gardner may have been the deciding factor in Gardner’s narrow victory. The loan was especially generous since there is no time line for Gardner to repay it, no state law that prohibits the party from simply forgiving it, and no requirement to report who repays it if it is repaid. Rowland also reports that a new headquarters for the Ohio Republican Party was “custom-designed around the state’s campaign finance laws.” The building was financed by a party trust fund that allowed corporations to exceed normal contribution limits. Rowland calls the new Republican headquarters “a veritable factory for in-kind contributions” since the TV and radio ads, computer services, and direct mailings that originate in the new headquarters count as in-kind contributions to party candidates.

Rowland’s series also details how the Democratic and Republican national parties used Ohio’s less restrictive campaign finance laws to their benefit. In 1996, the Democratic National Committee directed out-of-state contributors to send unsolicited contributions to the Ohio Democratic Party. The money is then transferred, or even sold back, to the national party. The biggest single contributor to the Ohio Democratic party in 1992 was Indonesian businessman James T. Riady, who gave $75,000 to the state party six days before President Clinton’s election.

The latest Ohio campaign finance data can be searched online at the Ohio Open Elections Project on the Web site of the Center for Responsive Politics.

When the bureaucrats in charge of computerizing state campaign finance records settle into their customary glacial rhythm, reporters have two choices: cover well-rehearsed sound bytes and photo opportunities while waiting for an information thaw, or start a fire by building their own campaign finance database.

A consortium of 29 newspapers and two TV stations in New York lit their own fire under local politicians this year when they set aside traditional rivalries to join forces and turn over 10,000 paper records into the most comprehensive campaign finance database in New York history. The result, according to Newsday’s Ford Fessenden, was “a blizzard of stories” putting state politicians on notice that the public is interested in their campaign finances. A telling example of the impact: A couple of years ago, a Newsday reporter noticed that the paper contribution reports from Governor Pataki’s office came sorted alphabetically by the contributor’s first name. Suspecting a computer was used to generate that order, the reporter called Gov. Pataki’s press secretary, Zenia Mucha, to ask for the governor’s campaign contributions in electronic form rather than on paper. Mucha laughed at the reporter.

The CFIC library, located online at www.campaignfinance .org/stories/index.html, is an archive of local, state and federal articles that use campaign contribution reports to “follow the money.” The library also serves as a complement to the CFIC’s online databases of state campaign finance contributions.

The three investigative series described above are just a few of the excellent examples of how campaign finance data can enhance state and local political reporting.

Ron Van Den Heuvel

It’s almost as if the U.S. Dept. of Justice doesn’t want – or simply refuses – to prosecute Ronald Henry Van Den Heuvel for anything he does, no matter what he does or how many people he hurts.

…even if Wally only gets a slap on the wrist and his many …many …major crimes – including using Huffman Aviation in Venice, Florida as a continuing criminal enterprise – are swept under the rug by state and federal authorities, just like the State of Wisconsin and the U.S. Government have done for Wally‘s buddy Ron Van Den Heuvel.

Guess it pays to know ‘friends’ (and handlers) in the CIA, the DEA, the FAA, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security!

Just like it pays to know Fmr. U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson (once you’ve paid to know him).

June 25, 2015, AGREED JUDGMENT in favor of United States of America against Wallace Hilliard in the amounts of $2,258,402.04 for the tax year 1996; $726,963.33 for the tax year 1997; $6,018.07 for the tax year 2007 and $3,616.37 for the tax year 2008. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb; U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin Case No. 3:2014-cv-408, United States of America v. Patricia Hilliard, Wallace Hillard, Bank of America NA, Hilliard Limited Partnership, Daniel Hilliard and Andrew Hilliard as Trustess of the Wallace J. Hilliard Fint Trust, and Green Bay Air, Inc.

September 9, 2015 ORDER granting Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb; U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin Case No. 3:2014-cv-408, United States of America v. Patricia Hilliard, Wallace Hillard, Bank of America NA, Hilliard Limited Partnership, Daniel Hilliard and Andrew Hilliard as Trustess of the Wallace J. Hilliard Fint Trust, and Green Bay Air, Inc.

Godfrey & Kahn: So we understand, as you sit here today, you don’t know of any writing evidencing the understanding we’ve been referring to, and you’re going to le me know if your understanding is incorrect by reviewing e-mails so that the next time we meet, you can deny your understanding if it turns out you’re mistaken, correct?

Ron Van Den Heuvel: Incorrect. The bank documents and the two resolutions from the shareholders and the board of directors definitely says I cannot buy anybody out without paying them in full.

G&K: Is there anything — any board of directors or members vote or writing evidencing an understanding between you and the members of Evergreen Development, LLC, to renew the promissory notes until the assets of Evergreen are sold?

RVDH: Other than the fact it just keeps happening. They understand. But no, I don’t think anything’s in writing. …

G&K: Is it your testimony then that you had an understanding with the Hilliard Limited Partnership that it would agree to renew the promissory note represented in Exhibit 1 until such time as the assets of Evergreen Development, LLC, were sold?

RVDH: Yes.

G&K: Okay. Was that ever put in writing?

RVDH: I’m not sure.

G&K: When was that understanding reached with Hilliard Limited Partnership?

RVDH: I talked to the guys many a time. And when we turned it from stock to a note, that was the understanding. I mean, they wanted on their balance sheet a note instead of stock so that they could value it, and I agreed to do it through an arm’s length transaction with full awareness that there was no way to pay it until the assets were sold and that I would work very diligently to sell the assets and not receive a wage from either one of the companies. I agreed to it.

G&K: With whom on behalf of Hilliard Limited Partnership did you reach this understanding to renew the promissory note represented by Exhibit 1?

RVDH: Mostly with Dan Hilliard, but I did talk to Neal Maccoux several times on it also.

G&K: And what role does Dan Hilliard play with Hilliard Limited Partnership?

RVDH: I don’t know.

G&K: Okay.

RVDH: He works for me though.

Starting page 77 of transcript marked Exhibit B from the above link:

Godfrey & Kahn: Did you discuss the compromise and settlement with Andy — Andy Hilliard’s father at all?

Ron Van Den Heuvel: Well, I didn’t. I said —I told him we had a tough situation going forward and financing was tough in this market; but I do believe that I used the term your boys are comfortable now that no assets will be sold underneath them without them being paid in full and/or that I’m diligently working hard and its a real project? And I shoed him the off-take agreement signed by the Kraft family and Wassau Paper. They were fairly — I think everybody is very comfortable that this deal is progressing as fast as possible.

G&K: Did you have a conversation with the senior Hilliard regarding the compromise and settlement referred to in paragraph 12 of your answer?

RVDH: The only thing I said to them is we came apart with a mortgage that should satisfy any issues that they had. I didn’t get into specifics. Wally and I were friends for a long time. I used to do all of his work, built all of his buildings as an architect, and did electrical work for him for years.

G&K: Did the Hilliard Limited Partnership agreement sign anything in writing documenting the compromise and settlement referred to in paragraph 12 of you answer?

RVDH: The only evidence I have that they did is they recorded the mortgage. So I don’t really have anything signed by them back because they always bring things for me to sign back to them and then they accepted it because they took the mortgage and filed it. So the mortgage went to them a couple times back and forth, and they wanted to talk about it and this and that. Finally, they agreed; and then shortly after they agreed they filed the mortgage.

G&K: When you say they agreed, who communicated to you that the Hilliard Limited Partnership agreed to the compromise and settlement contained in paragraph 12 of the answer?

RVDH: Well, Dan negotiated or I shouldn’t say negotiated. Dan is the one who told me that they agreed, and basically a couple different times he said the mortgage was a good idea, and I know Dan is inside of our group working as hard as anybody to get this closed.

Was Ron Van Den Heuvel running a criminal enterprise about which your clients OSGC & GBRE made the same misrepresentations to the City of Green Bay that Ron Van Den Heuvel also made to individual investors like your client Dr. Marco Araujo, or not?

It sure looks like your client OSGC and their business partner Ron Van Den Heuvel were following your described plans but using the Oneida Tribe to fraudulently obtain state & federal financing for their shared scam which you ‘successfully’ defended before the Wisconsin Supreme Court.